• 조형예술학연구
• /
• 제2권
• /
• pp.222-238
• /
• 2000

The attempts to explain the criterion of art criticism can be divided into three directions. The first is that there is a universal criterion of criticism. The second is that criticism is a subjective impression of each critic. Therefore, there is no universal criterion beyond a subjective impression. The third is that denies both claims. It tries to and the objective criterion which is neither universal nor subjective. In this paper, I will see how John Dewey criticizes the first two theories and holds the third theory. Dewey's denial of the first theory can be seen in his view of the judical criticism. The judical criticism claims that art criticism can be made on the universal criterion, as judical decision can be made on the general rule supposed to be applicable to all cases. But Dewey claims that the judical criticism cannot explain what makes the artist the 'masters'. Defining art as an experience, Dewey claims that art is a process of doing and undergoing, and that art is essentially an interactive activity between men and his environment As environment changes, the experience of the environment also changes. So art should accept the possibility of new experience. But, since the judical criticism advocates of the universal criterion which cannot allow the changeability, Dewey denies it. On the other hand, Dewey's denial of the second theory can be seen in his view of the impressionist criticism. The impressionist criticism claims that criticism is to clarify the impression which is consisted of feeling and imagery the art object evokes. To this claim, Dewey replies that to clarify an impression is to analyze it, and analysis can proceed only by going beyond the impression to the judgement. As we have seen so far, Dewey has denied the judical criticism that there is a universal criterion supposed to be applicable to all criticism. He has also denied the impressionist criticism that there are only subjective responses to the art object, and hence that there is no criterion of criticism at all. For Dewey, these two criticism are based on the same false assumption of the criterion, although their conclusions are different from each other. Both the judical and impressionist criticism failed to realize the difference between the meaning of the criterion as applied in measurement and as used in criticism. Criticizing of these two views of criticism, Dewey claims that there is an objective criterion which is neither universal nor subjective. Art criticism is objective in tv#o senses, i. e., in the first sense that it can be judged by the properties of the art object and in the second sense that it can be verified by the communities of the critics.

• 한국의류학회지
• /
• 제47권3호
• /
• pp.459-474
• /
• 2023

Contemporary fashion criticism tends to rely solely on the established art criticism process without consideration of the distinctive characteristics of fashion. Thus, this study aims to reveal the unique roles and characteristics of fashion criticism by recognizing it as an independent field in contemporary art with its own social significance. This study will first apply traditional art criticism models to analyze and explore contemporary fashion criticism's empirical content before uncovering the uniqueness of contemporary fashion criticism by content analysis. Contemporary fashion criticism discusses not just physical objects but various topics and ideas, as well. Accordingly, the existing criticism model was modified in this study to fit contemporary fashion criticism and organized into five stages: description of historical fashion, form description, external evaluation, interpretation, and internal evaluation. Commerciality, the human body, coordination, the critic's individuality, trends, and fashion-related persons were identified as key factors of contemporary fashion criticism's uniqueness. In conclusion, rather than build a single contemporary fashion model, this study found it more effective to create individual fashion criticism models suitable for detailed fields, as these enable the discussion of multifaceted topics in the fashion field. This study is expected to serve a meaningful guide for the fashion discourses.

• 대한가정학회지
• /
• 제44권11호
• /
• pp.35-42
• /
• 2006

A criticism model for dress was developed to offer a methodological insight into research on aesthetics of dress. Concepts from Edmund B. Feldman's art criticism model, James D. Carney's style-relative model of art criticism, and Sung Bok Kim's fashion criticism model were borrowed and integrated to create a criticism model for dress, comprising identification of styles, descriptive features, aesthetic value features, external interpretation, socio-cultural interpretation, and evaluation. Both inductive and deductive approaches for the identification of styles can be made in the process of dress criticism. In the former case, descriptive features and aesthetic features are sequentially identified to locate the styles of dress. In the latter case, styles are identified first, and descriptive features and aesthetic features are identified accordingly. Logical criticisms can be made based on the critics' background knowledge of the history of dress and art.

• 인문언어
• /
• 제1권2호
• /
• pp.141-158
• /
• 2001

Criticism of today finds itself in an awkward situation, for it is now being transformed in the same way that literature and the arts were transformed by the avant-garde movements at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century. It is characterized predominantly by a break with harmony and with the values of realism. As such, it is driven by a post-modem ethos, an artistic, social, and cultural phenomenon that veers toward open, fragmentary, and indeterminate forms. In this paper, I examine today's most urgent social and cultural issues with reference to artistic production and criticism, in order to illuminate the true nature of criticism. The outstanding questions in the world of art criticism are given in five categories: the lack of critical reality in argumentative criticism; the problem of artistic and literary production in global capitalism; the artistic mind and its consciousness of socio-historical ideology; anxiety of the rise of cyberjournalistic criticism; and the question of subordination to western systems in the field of interpretation and criticism. For my analysis, I have tried to formulate a three-dimensional critique structure that will help us organize the relationships between the points of argument: 1) criticism as a creative force behind the artist; 2) criticism as critique of artistic production; and 3) criticism as critique of other critics. This multi-layered structure will be appropriate to our task of interpretation and evaluation, as the proposed complex structure of criticism will be able to embrace the diverse aspects of our problematic argument. In the final analysis, my argument resolves itself into a question of art, more specifically into a question of criticism as a protective device of art in an age threatened by globalization and cultural monopolization.

• 철학연구
• /
• 제142권
• /
• pp.295-321
• /
• 2017

이 논문은 헤겔 비판본 전집 16권에 실린 변심자들에 대하여(${\ddot{U}}ber$ die Bekehrten) 란 기고문을 중심으로 헤겔이 보여주는 예술비평의 개념을 논의한다. 헤겔은 예술의 체계를 구성한 이론가이기도 하지만 또한 대중적 예술 실천에 적극적으로 참여한 예술 비평가이기도 하다. 지금까지 헤겔은 대개 예술의 체계를 구성한 이론가로만 해석되었다. 많은 해석에 따르면 헤겔은 자신의 이론을 무리하게 작품 해석에 뒤집어 씌었다는 비판을 받고 있다. 하지만 우리는 이 기고문 속에서 예술 비평가인 헤겔의 다른 모습을 보게 된다. 먼저 기고문에서 예술 비평가로서 헤겔은 낭만주의자들이 어떻게 무리하게 이론을 중시하면서 작품을 왜곡하는지를 보여준다. 헤겔은 1826년 초에 쓴 기고문에서 낭만주의적 반어 이론이 라우파흐의 "변심자들" 작품 이해에 전혀 도움이 되지 않는다고 주장한다. 반어 이론은 인물과 행위의 모순을 작품의 핵심적 가치로 해석하는 반면, 헤겔은 이 작품 속에 희극적인 것이 놓여 있다고 해석하는데, 여기서 희극적인 것이란 성격의 비본질적인 측면들이 지양되는 과정을 통해 성격의 통일성이 표현되는 것이다. 또한 기고문에서 헤겔은 반어 이론이 전문가를 위한 예술작품만을 대변할 뿐이며, 이는 예술작품의 객관성의 측면을 훼손한다고 해석하면서 '대중을 위한 예술작품'을 대변한다. 두 번째로 헤겔은 자신의 이러한 비평의 성과를 자신의 미학강의에 적용하기 시작한다. 1826년 이후부터 헤겔은 미학강의에서 집중적으로 두 개념, 즉 낭만주의적 반어와 '대중을 위한 예술작품'을 논의했다. 따라서 위 기고문은 1826년 이후의 헤겔의 반어이론 비판과 대중을 위한 예술작품 개념 논의를 위한 내용의 기초를 제공하고 있다. 이 점에서 우리는 헤겔이 체계적인 이론을 구성해서 이를 무리하게 작품에 적용하기보다는 오히려 구체적인 예술작품에 대한 비평 실천을 통해 자신의 이론을 보강하고 확장했다고 볼 수 있다.

• 아동학회지
• /
• 제20권2호
• /
• pp.187-204
• /
• 1999

The 20 five-year-old kindergarteners in the experimental group participated in 14 art criticism activities over an 8 week period. Analysis of the data by frequency, percentage, and t-test showed differences between the experimental and control groups. The experimental group improved in Visual Cue-Attendance and Evaluative Judgmental categories. Children in the experimental group also showed higher scores in organization of pictures and materials in their expressive art work. There were no differences between groups in sequence and contents of expression.

• 디자인학연구
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• pp.139-150
• /
• 2006

예술작품의 평가는 작품의 제작과 감상자체가 매우 정성적인 가치관을 기반으로 한다는 전제아래 객관적으로 수치화 하려는 노력을 찾아보기 어려웠다. 이에 1960년대 말 이후로 후기 모더니즘적 사조 내에서 급격히 증가하는 미디어아트를 중심으로 기존의 예술평가의 핵심이 되었던 감상자의 주관적 의견을 최대한 반영할 수 있으며 동시에 미디어아트에 포함되는 기계적, 제품적 측면도 동시에 검토할 수 있는 정량적 평가체계의 구축을 시도하였다. 이에 따라 제시되는 평가체계의 항목에는 매체평가, 작품평가, 감상평가, 상품평가, 전시평가를 포함하였으며 관람자의 미디어아트에 대한 경험수준에 따라 일반감상자, 미디어아트 전문가 그리고 전시관련 업종 종사자, 즉 전시기획자로 분류하여 평가를 실행하도록 하였다. FGD를 거쳐 평가자에 따라, 그리고 평가항목에 따라 가중치를 적용하여 작품에 대한 객관적인 비평과 주관적 선호도를 적절하게 적용하는 평가체계가 되도록 수정하였다.

• 한국실내디자인학회논문집
• /
• 제29호
• /
• pp.112-119
• /
• 2001

In general, the definition of criticism is making a constructive analysis between good & evil, right & wrong, and beauty & ugliness. Just as the literature, art, music, and architecture welcomes productive criticism in order for further advancement in each professional field, constructive criticism in the field of interior architecture must be activated stance it would be as useful as in other fields to upgrade the level of design quality If the constructive criticism were to be taken properly in the benefit of further advancement in particular design, then the criticism must hale a proper criteria in order to examine and review the design work objectively However, as the design symbolizes cultural interpretation and reaction towards better creativity, we expect design to be mutated in many different directions. As the limit of Interior architecture shares limitless possibilities in today's society, it seems that we need to set up a guidelines of design criticism in order to support the further development of the area of interior architecture.

• 한국의류학회지
• /
• 제40권3호
• /
• pp.437-455
• /
• 2016

This paper proposes a multi-disciplinary approach for fashion criticism in museology through an analysis of the 2014 Charles James's retrospective. It includes the following elicitations. First, it explores a critical discussion of "dress museology" as well as "fashion museology" and the complexity of fashion in museums. Second, this paper reorganizes Fleming's (1974) artifact study and Crane and Bovone's (2006) critical theory for fashion criticism in museology by comparing "object-based" research with an "academic" approach. Third, it applies fashion criticism methodology as a case study to the aforementioned museum fashion exhibit, entitled . We can subsequently begin to reconsider concepts of art and fashion within present culture based on inclusive fashion criticism of aesthetic and cultural events.

• 한국의류산업학회지
• /
• 제16권1호
• /
• pp.66-78
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study is to illuminate the location of fashion in contemporary society and to suggest a direction for fashion criticism in aesthetic$\hat{u}$cultural perspective. For this, literature researches about some of art criticism and fashion criticism theories and cultural studies related to fashion are performed. In this study, fashion criticism is defined as a linguistic analysis and interpretation about a variety of discursive networks around fashion as well as an aesthetic analysis of it. Considering this definition, an analytical framework for the contemporary fashion criticism combines Feldman's and Carney's models with Crane & Bovone's and Entwistle's sociological studies for aesthetic and cultural perspectives. At first, its aesthetic perspective shows 'Description'-'Descriptive formative features', 'Analysis'-'Locate the style' and 'Aesthetic value', 'Interpretation'- 'Interpretation of the fashion object' and 'Socio-cultural interpretation', 'Judgment'-'Critical judgment'. Then, its cultural perspective especially emphasizes 'Socio-cultural interpretation' of the 6 steps above. Socio-cultural interpretation gets tangled with the network of various cultural agents within the fashion system, producers/designers, retailers/suppliers, media/editors, consumers/spectators, and so on. In the course of the fashion system 5 analytical methods about the fashion object can be suggested and they are as follows: Analyses of texts, discourses and symbols of a fashion object, Analyses of fashion systems which produces symbolic values, Analyses of the communication of symbolic values and the disseminating processes through the media, Analyses of the attribution of symbolic values to a fashion object by consumers, and Cross-national studies of symbolic values expressed in a fashion object.